What is CVE-2026-58138?

CVE-2026-58138 is Orkes Conductor 3.21.21 < 3.30.2 Unauthenticated RCE via GraalVM Script Evaluators. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Remote Code Exec mapped to CWE-94 Code Injection.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Exploitation is reported, but no independent confirmation is available in the sources we have. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-58138 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

9 public PoC repositories reported; 3 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, EDR process telemetry, host service logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-58138 using CVSS 9.8, EPSS 9%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

criticalRemote Code Execpublic exploit

CVE-2026-58138

CVE-2026-58138 — Orkes Conductor 3.21.21 < 3.30.2 Unauthenticated RCE via GraalVM Script Evaluators

Q: Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Q: Is there active exploitation?

Exploitation is reported, but no independent confirmation is available in the sources we have. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

Q: Is it in CISA KEV?

No. CVE-2026-58138 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Q: Is there a public exploit?

9 public PoC repositories reported; 3 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

Q: How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, EDR process telemetry, host service logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

Q: How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-58138 using CVSS 9.8, EPSS 9%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Q: Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Q: Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

Q: What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

Orkes Conductor 3.21.21 before 3.30.2 contains an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability that allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands by submitting inline workflow definitions containing malicious JavaScript or Python expressions to the workflow API endpoint prior to authentication. Attackers can exploit unsandboxed GraalVM evaluators configured with HostAccess.ALL or allowAllAccess(true) through INLINE, LAMBDA, DO_WHILE, and SWITCH task types to invoke arbitrary system commands via Java reflection or direct subprocess calls.

Published Jun 30, 2026Updated Jul 14, 2026Sources: NVD, conductor-oss (CNA), Exploit-DB, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Reported

not confirmed by CISA

EPSS

ahead of 95% of scored CVEs

Affects

conductor-oss

conductor

CVSS base

9.8

critical · 2 sources

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade conductor to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
conductor-oss	conductor	3.21.21 to < 3.30.2	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

High

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

None

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
9.8	CVSS 3.1	critical	3.9	5.9	VulnCheck (CNA), conductor-oss (CNA)
9.3	CVSS 4.0	critical	—	—	conductor-oss (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-94 · Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

Bypass Protection Mechanism
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Hide Activities

Mitigation: Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-94Code Injection

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-242 · Code InjectionCAPEC-77 · Manipulating User-Controlled VariablesCAPEC-35 · Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files

T1027.006Obfuscated Files or Information: HTML Smuggling
T1027.009Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded Payloads
T1564.009Hide Artifacts: Resource Forking

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

3 of the 5 sampled are weaponized

Exploit entries

Exploit-DB and CTI exploit indexes

Social mentions

Posts naming this CVE. Attention, not evidence of exploitation — it spikes on disclosure and decays whether or not anything is exploited.

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable conductor.
Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 9 public PoC repositories were reported.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSEDR process telemetryhost service logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Cve is exploited OrkesConductor 3.30.2 - Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution
Aug 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
Added · webapps entry: OrkesConductor 3.30.2 - Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution
Aug 10, 2026 · Exploit-DB
Cve is exploited Ch4120N/CVE-2026-58138
Jul 20, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
Cve is exploited BiiTts/CVE-2026-58138-Conductor-Unauth-RCE
Jul 20, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
Added · CVSS 3.1 9.8 (AV:N)
Jul 14, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Jun 30, 2026 · NVD

Source activity

Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.

5×Github ReposJun 30, 2026 – Jul 27, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
3×Tweets · 1 time tweeted.Jul 1, 2026 – Jul 28, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
3×SvrsJul 20, 2026 – Jul 28, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
2×CVE modified by MITRE: CVSS metrics updated.Jun 30, 2026 – Jul 2, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
1×CVE appeared in the Cve Trends.Jul 27, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

6 on the record

github.com/conductor-oss/conductor/commit/87a7d96aabbb706d6e84f812b93da5165028d18f
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
github.com/conductor-oss/conductor/commit/c691e35e768caeb802c9f06ecdd9674c80081af1
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
github.com/conductor-oss/conductor/releases/tag/v3.30.2
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26074
Vendor Advisory, Mitre, NIST
www.vulncheck.com/advisories/orkes-conductor-unauthenticated-rce-via-graalvm-script-evaluators
Vendor Advisory, NIST
www.exploit-db.com/exploits/52633
Vendor Advisory

Coverage

2 stories from the feeds we poll

Elsewhere on this site

conductor-ossevery CVE for this vendor
Remote Code Execsame class
CWE-94other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-58138 is Orkes Conductor 3.21.21 < 3.30.2 Unauthenticated RCE via GraalVM Script Evaluators, a critical vulnerability affecting conductor from conductor-oss. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Exploitation is reported, but no independent confirmation is available in the sources we have. Public exploit evidence is: 9 public PoC repositories reported; 3 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 9.8 describes technical severity, while EPSS 9% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.